hodler

2 Jun 2026, 20:28

US Treasury Cracks Down On Crypto Ties To Iran: 4 Exchanges Receive New Sanctions

The US Treasury has announced a new round of Iran-related sanctions targeting crypto channels used to move value across borders, with Treasury officials arguing that Iran has turned to digital asset tools to bypass restrictions and maintain access to international funds. New Iran Sanctions On Crypto Exchanges The Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) said Tuesday it designated Nobitex, described as Iran’s largest digital asset exchange, along with three other Iranian exchanges, as part of an initiative branded “Economic Fury.” The Treasury positioned the designations as part of the Trump administration’s broader effort to reduce what officials call the threat posed by the Iranian regime. According to the OFAC release, Nobitex provided substantial assistance to the regime by processing more than half of all Iranian digital asset inflows in 2025. Treasury officials also said the platform facilitated payments tied to Iran’s terrorist activities, sanctions evasion efforts, and transactions linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). In addition, Treasury claims Nobitex helped the Central Bank of Iran access “hundreds of millions of dollars” in stablecoins, which were used to support the plummeting value of the Iranian rial. The exchange, the release adds, also enabled regime insiders to reach international digital asset exchanges and evade sanctions across multiple jurisdictions. Binance Pushes Back In remarks tied to the announcement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Iran’s economy is “in free fall,” but that the regime has nevertheless sought to “co-opt digital asset technologies” for what he described as a corrupt agenda—specifically to evade US sanctions. Bessent concluded his comments by saying that the Treasury intends to keep “following the money” to stop the regime from developing a nuclear weapon. He said this approach would extend beyond the traditional banking system and reach “through digital assets” as well. While the OFAC designations focused on Iranian exchanges, scrutiny has been spreading beyond Iran’s borders. Bitcoinist previously reported that attention has also rippled to Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange. In a February 24 letter to Binance co-CEO Richard Teng, Senator Richard Blumenthal cited reports suggesting the company enabled “large-scale violations” of US and international sanctions involving Iran. Blumenthal wrote that Binance appeared to have ignored warnings and recommendations intended to prevent Iranian money-laundering schemes. He alleged that the crypto exchange allowed approximately $1.7 billion in transfers connected to Iran. Binance, for its part, rejected the allegations ahead of the senator’s inquiry. In a statement dated February 22, the company said it conducted an internal review and found “no evidence of violations of applicable sanctions laws.” Featured image created with OpenArt; chart from TradingView.com

2 Jun 2026, 20:19

Crypto In 401(k)s: Senators Sanders, Warren Letter Warns $14 Trillion At Risk From DOL Proposal

Democrats in Congress are pressing back against a US Department of Labor (DOL) proposal that could significantly expand how Americans can use 401(k) retirement accounts—particularly by allowing allocations to crypto assets. In a letter shared with The Guardian, Senator Bernie Sanders, Senator Elizabeth Warren, and House education and workforce committee ranking member Bobby Scott of Virginia said the proposal would place an estimated $14.2 trillion in 401(k) savings at risk. They also warned that the change likely would not survive a court challenge. The Fight Over Crypto Access In Retirement Plans According to the letter, the proposal would “strip long-held investor protections from retirement savers” and encourage “more risky, complex, and expensive investments.” The lawmakers called it harmful to American workers, pointing to the way these alternative assets can behave during market stress. They argue that extreme price swings are not a hypothetical risk but a known feature of the crypto market and other private-market products. Related Reading: Bitcoin Price Falls To $67,000 And Breaks The Map For Bulls—Here’s What Happens Next Beyond price volatility, the lawmakers warned that the change could mean higher costs. They said the rule could expose workers to higher fees and erode long-term returns. Those concerns have also been echoed by regulators and watchdog groups. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (Finra) has cautioned that crypto investments “have experienced higher levels of volatility relative to more traditional investment assets” and that “the risk of losing all of your investment is significant.” In addition, the FBI reported that cryptocurrency fraud complaints are among the highest-loss categories in cyber-enabled fraud. The bureau said Americans reported more than $11 billion in losses in 2025, underscoring what Democrats describe as another layer of danger beyond market swings. Critics See Conflict Of Interest Democrats also raised questions about political and financial connections. They pointed to alleged links between the crypto industry and President Donald Trump, arguing the proposal could present a conflict of interest. The Trump administration, however, has defended the approach as a way to expand investment choices. In a statement, the labor secretary’s acting counterpart, Keith Sonderling, said: The department’s days of picking winners and losers are over. Our rule clearly spells out that managers must evaluate any and all potential product offerings by following a prudent process. Related Reading: Binance Unveils Trading Access To Over 7,000 US Stocks, ETFs—And Adds A New Tokenization Plan Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent similarly argued the move advances the administration’s broader goals, adding that the Treasury Department is “proud of this rule-making effort,” describing it as another step toward President Trump’s “Golden Age.” Featured image created with OpenArt; chart from TradingView.com

2 Jun 2026, 20:00

Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren Urge Labor Department to Drop Bitcoin, Crypto 401K Plan

The senators said a plan allowing fiduciaries to offer exposure to riskier assets like crypto and private equity would hurt retirees and personally benefit President Trump.

2 Jun 2026, 19:10

Strive adds 2,500 Bitcoin for $185 million, lifting total holdings to 19,000 BTC

Strive (NASDAQ: STRV) purchased 2,500 Bitcoins between May 23 and June 1 for approximately $185.2 million, bringing the company’s treasury to 19,000 BTC The 2,500 BTC purchase was funded almost entirely through the company’s Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Preferred Stock (SATA), with an average cost of about $74,092 per coin. Is Strive still buying BTC? An SEC 8-K filing confirmed that Strive raised most of the money used for its most recent Bitcoin purchase through its SATA stock. The company issued 1,754,188 new shares that generated approximately $175.4 million. The remaining $9.8 million came from selling Class A common stock (ASST). The average price Strive paid per coin was $74,092, which is lower than its previous purchase when it bought 1,109 BTC at about $76,989 per coin. During the latest purchase window, Bitcoin traded below $71,000 at certain points, meaning the treasury firm bought during a price drop. Strive’s holdings have risen from 16,500 BTC to 19,000 BTC, representing a 15.2% increase in total holdings over a single reporting period. The CEO, Matt Cole, disclosed the deal on X , adding that the company has a quarter-to-date BTC yield of 23.0%, a year-to-date yield of 36.7%, and an amplification ratio of 57.0%. The 8-K filing also shows cash and equivalents rising from $93.3 million to $137.3 million, even after Strive spent $185 million on Bitcoin. Strive raised about $229 million total from both equity instruments, and the company stated that the higher cash balance helps it maintain an 18-month dividend reserve for SATA holders. Strategy’s rare Bitcoin sale Strategy (NASDAQ: MSTR), the largest corporate Bitcoin holder at 843,706 BTC, disclosed that around the same time as Strive’s purchase, it had sold 32 Bitcoins for $2.5 million to fund dividend payments on its own preferred stock, STRC. This is the second time Strategy has ever sold any of its Bitcoin holdings. Michael Saylor, Strategy’s executive chairman, responded to Cole’s announcement regarding the Bitcoin purchase with a brief endorsement on X, posting “@Strive for Bitcoin.” Cole previously announced that Strive expects to increase the size of its at-the-market programs by $2.1 billion each for Class A shares and SATA, which would bring total ATM capacity to approximately $5.15 billion. However, the expansion requires amended SEC filings and a certificate of amendment for SATA. Strive plans to change SATA‘s current dividend payouts from a monthly to a daily basis beginning June 16, in order to smooth out the concentrated buying pressure that currently builds ahead of each monthly ex-dividend date, and potentially reduce the periodic pauses in Bitcoin accumulation that observers have noticed. Don’t just read crypto news. Understand it. Subscribe to our newsletter. It's free .

2 Jun 2026, 18:10

Amazon sued over Ring doorbell facial recognition feature in privacy class action

BitcoinWorld Amazon sued over Ring doorbell facial recognition feature in privacy class action Amazon faces a proposed class action lawsuit filed Monday in Seattle federal court, alleging that its Ring doorbell cameras violate privacy laws through the Familiar Faces facial recognition feature. The lawsuit, brought by Virginia resident Charles Sigwalt, claims that Ring stores biometric data of passersby without their knowledge or consent, potentially affecting millions of Americans. How Familiar Faces works and why it raises concerns Ring introduced Familiar Faces in September, allowing users to opt in to an AI-powered system that identifies people who frequently appear at their door. Instead of generic alerts like “a person is at the door,” users receive specific notifications such as “Dad is at the door” or “mail carrier is at the door.” While the feature requires user consent, privacy advocates and now the lawsuit argue that the individuals being scanned—neighbors, delivery workers, and random pedestrians—have not agreed to have their facial data collected or stored. Ring has stated that face data is encrypted, never shared with third parties, and that unidentified faces are automatically deleted after 30 days. However, the lawsuit contends that the mere collection of biometric information without explicit consent violates state and federal privacy protections. Amazon’s history of privacy issues with Ring This lawsuit is not an isolated incident. In 2023, Amazon settled with the Federal Trade Commission and paid a $5.8 million fine over allegations that Ring employees and contractors had unrestricted access to customer video footage, including private recordings of women. The FTC complaint revealed that every employee had full access to every customer video, regardless of job necessity. Ring has also faced scrutiny over its relationships with law enforcement. The company previously allowed police to request footage from users without a warrant, a practice that drew sharp criticism from civil liberties organizations. In 2024, Ring canceled a planned partnership with Flock Safety, a video surveillance company that reportedly provided footage to ICE and other federal agencies, after public backlash. Why this matters for consumers The case highlights a growing tension between smart home convenience and privacy rights. Facial recognition technology, even when marketed as optional, captures data from people who have no relationship with the device owner. For consumers, the lawsuit raises practical questions about who is being recorded, how that data is used, and what legal recourse exists for individuals who never consented to biometric scanning. Legal experts note that class action outcomes in this area could set precedents for how companies deploy facial recognition in consumer devices. If the court rules against Amazon, it may force Ring to redesign the feature or implement stricter notice and consent mechanisms for non-users. What happens next Amazon has not yet responded to the lawsuit. The case is in its early stages, and no court date has been set. For now, Familiar Faces remains available to Ring users who opt in, but the legal challenge adds pressure on Amazon to address long-standing privacy concerns. The outcome could influence how other smart home manufacturers approach facial recognition technology. FAQs Q1: What is the Familiar Faces feature on Ring doorbells? A1: Familiar Faces is an optional AI-powered feature that uses facial recognition to identify people who frequently visit a home, such as family members or delivery drivers, and sends personalized notifications instead of generic alerts. Q2: Who is affected by this class action lawsuit? A2: The lawsuit seeks to represent anyone in the United States who was captured by a Ring doorbell camera without their consent and had their facial recognition data collected through the Familiar Faces feature. Q3: Has Amazon faced similar privacy issues before? A3: Yes. In 2023, Amazon paid a $5.8 million FTC fine over Ring employee access to customer videos. Ring has also faced criticism for its law enforcement partnerships and data-sharing practices. This post Amazon sued over Ring doorbell facial recognition feature in privacy class action first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

2 Jun 2026, 17:05

MicroStrategy’s Bitcoin Sale Won’t Trigger Corporate Sell-Off Wave, Analysts Say

BitcoinWorld MicroStrategy’s Bitcoin Sale Won’t Trigger Corporate Sell-Off Wave, Analysts Say MicroStrategy, the largest publicly traded corporate holder of Bitcoin, recently sold a portion of its BTC holdings, prompting questions about whether other companies with digital asset treasuries might follow suit. However, analysts interviewed by Decrypt argue that the move is an isolated event and does not signal a broader trend of corporate crypto sell-offs. An Isolated Decision, Not a Market Signal Luke Nolan, a senior researcher at CoinShares, explained that while MicroStrategy’s sale is notable given the company’s high profile, it does not create pressure for other firms to sell their Bitcoin. “The decision by one company to sell is a completely separate issue from what others may do,” Nolan said. “It’s significant because it’s the largest and most well-known corporate holder, but it doesn’t set a precedent for the rest of the market.” Corporate Treasuries Are Driven by Individual Needs Bitwise analyst Kamran Khorasbi reinforced this view, stating that whether other companies sell their Bitcoin holdings depends almost entirely on their own financial circumstances. “MicroStrategy’s move has little to do with the broader corporate crypto treasury landscape,” Khorasbi noted. “Each company has its own cash flow needs, tax considerations, and strategic goals. A single sale does not signal the end of corporate crypto treasuries.” Why This Matters for Investors The analysis provides reassurance to Bitcoin investors who may have feared a domino effect following MicroStrategy’s sale. The company’s decision appears to be a routine treasury management action rather than a reflection of weakening confidence in Bitcoin as a corporate asset. The broader trend of companies allocating portions of their treasuries to digital assets remains intact, with many firms still holding long-term positions. Conclusion MicroStrategy’s Bitcoin sale, while noteworthy, is unlikely to trigger a wave of similar moves by other publicly traded companies. According to analysts, each corporate treasury operates independently, and the decision to sell or hold Bitcoin depends on individual financial strategies rather than the actions of a single market participant. The event underscores the importance of viewing corporate crypto holdings on a case-by-case basis. FAQs Q1: Did MicroStrategy sell all of its Bitcoin? No, the company sold only a portion of its holdings. It remains the largest publicly traded corporate holder of Bitcoin. Q2: Should other companies with Bitcoin treasuries be expected to sell now? Analysts say no. Each company’s decision to sell or hold Bitcoin depends on its own financial situation, not on MicroStrategy’s actions. Q3: Does this sale signal that Bitcoin is a bad corporate asset? Not according to analysts. The sale is seen as a routine treasury management move, not a reflection of Bitcoin’s value as a long-term corporate reserve asset. This post MicroStrategy’s Bitcoin Sale Won’t Trigger Corporate Sell-Off Wave, Analysts Say first appeared on BitcoinWorld .